Post on 25-Feb-2016
description
transcript
Reducing Third Party Damage to High Pressure Pipelines
Neil JacksonPolicy Manager, Transmission
Introduction Background
Current measures to prevent third party interference
What more can pipeline operators do?
A possible benchmarking process
EGIG data highlights that external interference is the most likely cause of pipeline failure
EGIG data also shows a reduction in the rate of external interference incidents
Ghislenghien, Belgium 2004
Caracas Venezuela failure 1993 508 mm dia 46 bar interference by rockwheel trencher
Caracas Venezuela cont’d
Cartwright failure in 1976 508mm dia 53 bar interference by road grader
Current Measures
Pipeline Standards including EN1594, National Standards and in some countries National Legislation currently requires pipeline operators to take a number of measures to reduce the likelihood of third party interference.
Typical Measures Include Routing pipelines away from populated areas Marking of pipelines with marker posts Using thicker pipe in built up areas Providing additional protection (e.g. concrete slabs) in
vulnerable areas Marking out of the pipeline and supervision of work Liaison with landowners and other key stakeholder groups Third party enquiry processes (including one call systems in some
countries) Pipeline Surveillance
Pipeline protection methods - Swiss cheese model
PIPELINE
PIPELINE SURVEILANCE
MARKER POSTS
LIASON WITH LANDOWNERS
SUPERVISION OF WORK
PIPELINE
Pipeline protection – additional methods
PIPELINE SURVEILANCE
MARKER POSTS
LIASON WITH LANDOWNERS
SUPERVISION OF WORK OTHERS ?
What more can operators do? In 2006 Marcogaz carried out a survey of measures that member
companies were taking to reduce the likelihood of third party interference
This exercise identified a number of common measures that the majority of member companies were applying
The survey also identified some additional measures that were taken by some companies
Examples of some of the additional measures that are being taken in the UK Collecting near miss data from helicopter surveillance flights to identify
companies that are frequently carrying out work without contacting pipeline operators
Senior management in the above companies have then been visited by our Safety Regulator in order for the companies to outline how they intend to improve their working practices.
Stakeholder workshop - all the major companies were invited to a workshop event at which there was constructive discussion on how working practices could be improved
Providing safety information for third parties in user friendly formats, e.g. brochures and DVDs
Marcogaz is Proposing a Benchmarking Process
The benchmarking process will capture best practice
It will allow pipeline operators to review their current systems and consider whether there are more steps that can be taken
Example of a Section of the Proposed Benchmarking Sheet
Management Systems
Type of Measure
Safety Measure Before digging starts
While Digging
When Damage Occurs
Physical Marker PostsSigns are installed and maintained to indicate the presence of a buried pipeline and include the pipeline operators contact details
Physical Surveillance
Pipeline routes are surveyed by air, patrols on foot or by car Managerial Third Party Liaison
Liaison with key stakeholders is undertaken regularly e.g. land owners, local authorities contractors etc. to improve awareness and relationships.
Managerial Support of training initiatives
Support provided to organisations or individuals carrying out works close to high pressure gas pipelines eg. excavator drivers
Managerial Proactively target Frequent Offenders
A traceability list of companies or organisations responsible for recurrent damages or near-misses is set-up and maintained.
Managerial Sharing Learning & Feedback Meeting
Engaging other utilities and industry stakeholders to share learning and feedback about the damaging process, incidents with common learning points, emergency intervention, list of non recommended subcontractors, damage figures etc.) e.g. through workshops.
Using the Benchmarking Sheets Suggested that the benchmarking sheets are used internally by pipeline
operators
Pipeline operators can score themselves against the identified measures
Example No systems in place - low score Systems in place but not fully implemented - medium score Systems in place and fully implemented – high score
Benchmarking Process
Evaluation of Performance Level for Each Safety Measure0-100% where 0 is lowest performance level i.e. operator currently does nothing and therefore plenty of scope for improvement
and 100% is a Fully Implemented solution with no room for improvement
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Insura
nce I
mplica
tions
Stakeh
older
Questi
onna
ire
One-ca
ll Sys
tems
Suppo
rt of tr
aining
initia
tives
Safe-di
gging
Qua
lifica
tion/C
ertific
ation
Punitiv
e Mea
sures
Provisi
on of
a Che
ck Li
st
Sharin
g Lea
rning
and F
eedb
ack
Pipelin
e rou
te se
lectio
n
Bench
marking
again
st Othe
rs
Emergen
cy P
lans
Marker
Posts
Pre-dig
Mee
ting
Record
ing In
ciden
ts an
d Nea
r Miss
es
Tempo
rary P
ipelin
e Prot
ectio
n
Indice
nt Inv
estig
ation
Additio
nal P
rotec
tion M
easu
res
Pipelin
e Des
ign
Superv
ision
of W
orks
Third P
arty D
igging
Enq
uiry P
roced
ure
Safety
Inform
ation
Prov
ision
to Thir
d Part
ies
Emergen
cy C
all C
entre
Proacti
vely
targe
t Frequ
ent O
ffend
ers
Restric
ted Zon
es
Surveil
lance
Third P
arty L
iaiso
n
Damag
e Ass
essm
ent C
riteria
In-Lin
e Ins
pecti
on
Pipelin
e Loc
ating
& M
arking
Out
Risk A
sses
smen
t
Rules f
or Emerg
encie
s
Perf
orm
ance
Lev
el %
Not all measures may be appropriate for all companies There may be good reasons why some measures are not appropriate
for all member companies Examples:
Requirements of national regulations Government bodies may have different responsibilities Geographic differences
Some measures may not be within the control of pipeline operators Examples:
Control of competency requirements for individuals carrying out work
National one call systems
What Next? Marcogaz is currently finalising the benchmarking document
Consideration will be given to whether the document should be published as a Marcogaz Technical Guidance document